Jordan Day wrote:2) Does anyone see anything wrong with my translation and understanding of the text?

That's too broad a question, really. There's not one single right way to do this -- have you noticed how many English translations of the Iliad are on the market? I think that if you want suggestions from members of this forum, you'd do best to ask more pointed questions about particular items in the text.

Ok, I really didn't have any more specific questions on these lines. To use golf terminology, I just wanted to make sure I was somewhere in the fairway. I will continue.

And Diomedes, who was good at battle shouting, slayed Axylus
son of Teuthras, who lived in the nicely constructed Arisbe,
[who] was rich in possessions, and a friend to mankind.
For while at home he showed kindness to all men [traveling] along the way.
But no one of these coming before him, meeting him [now], kept sad destruction away.
But took the soul of both.
Him and [his] assistant Kalesius, who at that time
was charioteer of the horses; but both went down to the ground.

1) Line 12: I never would have thought that βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης would mean "Diomedes, good in the battle-cry", his note about an accusative of respect certainly helped here. Is there another possible interpretation where βοὴν is not an accusative of respect? He says the "acc. of respect is common after an adj., here ἀγαθός." It seems to me that it comes before, not after, the adjective in this case.
2) Line 13: ἐϋκτιμένῃ ἐν Ἀρίσβῃ, Am I going to be seeing this a lot in Homer? something that goes inside the prepositional phrase sitting outside?
3) Line 15: ὁδῷ ἔπι, anastrophe according to Steadman. Makes sense I guess, but just strange to a newbie At least one translation I looked at seemed to think that ὁδῷ stood by itself and the prep.phrase was ἔπι οἰκία. Which is more likely?
4) Line 19: τὼ δ᾽ ἄμφω γαῖαν ἐδύτην, some translations say "They both went down to the underworld". I didnt see anything is LSJ that would support that understanding of γαῖα, but could that understanding still be justified within the context?

Jordan Day wrote:4) Line 19: τὼ δ᾽ ἄμφω γαῖαν ἐδύτην, some translations say "They both went down to the underworld". I didnt see anything is LSJ that would support that understanding of γαῖα, but could that understanding still be justified within the context?

Look that the LSJ entry for the verb, if you can't find what you're looking for with the noun. The LSJ for δύω contains

The underworld is what was understood to be under the earth. It is an attempt to translate with what is supposed to be the Greek understanding, rather than leave us to perhaps assume they were just buried.

1) Line 12: I never would have thought that βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης would mean "Diomedes, good in the battle-cry", his note about an accusative of respect certainly helped here. Is there another possible interpretation where βοὴν is not an accusative of respect? He says the "acc. of respect is common after an adj., here ἀγαθός." It seems to me that it comes before, not after, the adjective in this case.

As you read more of Homer, you're going to see more and more of these "traditional epithets" for named persons who appear repeatedly in the course of the poetic narrative. This has to do with the very nature of Homeric poetry as constituted from stock phrases of fixed metrical character: when Diomedes appears in the nominative as the subject of a verb, then this phrase, which fits precisely into the second half of a hexameter line following the caesura, will be used for him -- again and again. Some have argued that reciter and audience never heard "βοὴν ἀγαθός", others (rightly, I think) believe that the poet's art requires the listener to think always of a warrior who cries out defiantly when in battle: that's Diomedes!

2) Line 13: ἐϋκτιμένῃ ἐν Ἀρίσβῃ, Am I going to be seeing this a lot in Homer? something that goes inside the prepositional phrase sitting outside?

Yes, you are going to see it a lot. I don't mean to be flippant here, but you need to remember that this is poetry -- that it is chanted in a distinct rhythmic pattern, and that its word-order is a far cry from that of either ordinary conversation or of narrative prose. Note too that this is another metrical phrase that fits exactly into the hexameter slot right after the central caesura: u _ uu_uu_ _; it's another metrical phrase with a traditional epithet: whenever you hear of something at Arise, you will always have this association with good, substantial foundations.

3) Line 15: ὁδῷ ἔπι, anastrophe according to Steadman. Makes sense I guess, but just strange to a newbie At least one translation I looked at seemed to think that ὁδῷ stood by itself and the prep.phrase was ἔπι οἰκία. Which is more likely?

What this means is that normal prose word-order would indeed be ἐπὶ οἰκͅίᾳ -- but in poetry anastrophe -- inversion of the object and the preposition, is not uncommon -- especially if it helps the meter, as it does here: ὀδῷ ἔπι (u_uu) fits neatly into dactylic hexameter; ἐπὶ ὁδῷ (υυυ_) does not. You have been reading this aloud as dactylic hexameter verse, haven't you? If not, you must. You'll get much more out of it by hearing, feeling the rhythm of the Homeric line.

4) Line 19: τὼ δ᾽ ἄμφω γαῖαν ἐδύτην, some translations say "They both went down to the underworld". I didnt see anything is LSJ that would support that understanding of γαῖα, but could that understanding still be justified within the context?

More literally this says "went into the earth" -- with all the associations of burial, of descent of the spirits into the nether realm.

Jordan Day wrote:1) Line 12: I never would have thought that βοὴν ἀγαθὸς Διομήδης would mean "Diomedes, good in the battle-cry", his note about an accusative of respect certainly helped here. Is there another possible interpretation where βοὴν is not an accusative of respect? He says the "acc. of respect is common after an adj., here ἀγαθός." It seems to me that it comes before, not after, the adjective in this case.

Perhaps you could understand "comes after" as "is syntactically dependent on" or something like that. The actual order is not so important as the grammatical case.

cwconrad wrote:
You have been reading this aloud as dactylic hexameter verse, haven't you?

Unfortunately I haven't the foggiest clue what that is supposed to sound like.

If not, you must. You'll get much more out of it by hearing, feeling the rhythm of the Homeric line.

I assume I will need to change my pronunciation too? I've been a Buthian for a few years now. I have been looking all over YouTube for someone giving a good authentic reading of this stuff, but each reading sounds entirely different from the others so I don't know which one to mimic. I would also need it explained thoroughly in the video bit by bit. It would be great if someone from here could make one.... maybe Mark Lightman

cwconrad wrote:
You have been reading this aloud as dactylic hexameter verse, haven't you?

Unfortunately I haven't the foggiest clue what that is supposed to sound like.

If not, you must. You'll get much more out of it by hearing, feeling the rhythm of the Homeric line.

I assume I will need to change my pronunciation too? I've been a Buthian for a few years now. I have been looking all over YouTube for someone giving a good authentic reading of this stuff, but each reading sounds entirely different from the others so I don't know which one to mimic. I would also need it explained thoroughly in the video bit by bit. It would be great if someone from here could make one.... maybe Mark Lightman

Until then, I guess I will keep reading it like simple narrative.

It will, of course, take some effort. As for pronunciation, I think it's the vowels and diphthongs that need to be pronounced differently from Buthian Koine pronunciation, in order for the vowels and diphthongs of the long syllables to be heard properly; that is to say, for instance, υ and οι will be different from each other (υ like French υ or German ü, οι like oy in oyster.

Even if you do no more than acquire a sense of the majestic rolling rhythm of the dactylic hexameter lines, I think it will enhance your experience of working through the text of Homer. But the effort involved in learning to read these lines aloud would greatly increase your enjoyment of the poetry.